You are wading too been into semantics. This post is a essentially a hypothetical where we are asked to put ourselves in the position of being GM, because that is who would hypothetically fire a coach. So in the context of this question Mickey Loomis does not exist or we 'are' Mickey Loomis. Further, although most head coaches do not make the final decision on player personnel moves, they often do have a lot of influence, can ask for certain players or positions of need, and are often granted those requests by GMs and/or owners. My point is that in the hypothetical context of this question, if I not Mickey or Gayle controlled DA's fate, I would presumably also have other powers, and if DA managed to scrape by enough with super weak schedule to buy himself another year such as say beating the Seahawks 24-21 in a home wildcard game and then losing to the Lions 35-28 in the next round, I would retain him but would not grant any of his requests to stretch the budget too far for 2024. I would make him prove it in 2024 with the draft picks we have and I would still let him spend more 2025 dollars in 2024 than most teams, but not top 3 like we have have been doing. I would make him prove that he can win on his own merits not edge the lowly Falcons and Bucs by a game or so while spending a fortune more than they are spending. You don't win it all by going all in on a coach who can't win on a level playing field, you win it all by going all in and tilting the playing field when you already have a coach who has shown they can win on a level playing field, and I would ask DA to do that.

If you were hypothetically Loomis you would most likely commit Hari Kari given the fact that you would hate yourself so badly.

No, if I was Loomis, Loomis would start making good decisions.